wretch
A tiny wrapper built around fetch with an intuitive syntax. :candy:
Runssource: GitHubTypeScriptMITcommit 32d5f68badf7
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: ajax, fetch, formdata, http, http client, http request, javascript and json.
wretch runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 0.5 minutes and hit 4 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
npm install builds without errors; Node.js tests pass 79/79, browser tests pass 58/58 on Chromium and 58/58 on Firefox, snippet tests pass 67/87 with 20 expected skips, type tests pass, Deno tests pass 59 steps, Bun tests pass 58/58.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- Node.js v18 installed but project requires >=22, preventing build6.5 minutes
- Playwright browsers (chromium_headless_shell, firefox) not found in cache3 minutes
- Deno --sloppy-imports flag renamed to --unstable-sloppy-imports in Deno 2.x0.5 minutes
- Deno lockfile v5 unsupported by Deno 2.2.70.1 minutes
- Install time
- under a minute
- Cold machine to finish
- 6 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 4 hit, 4 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- npm run test:node: 79 passed, 0 failed; npm run test:browser: Chromium 58/58, Firefox 58/58; npm run test:deno: 59 steps passed, 0 failed; npm run test:bun: 58 passed, 0 failed; npm run test:snippets: 67 passed, 20 skipped; npm run test:types: exit 0
- Model tokens used
- 51,159
- Exact commit tested
- 32d5f68badf7
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
(pass) Wretch > should chain toFetch with other wretch methods [0.60ms] (pass) Wretch > should allow reusing the body after a WretchError has been thrown [0.57ms] (pass) Mix > should mix two objects [0.16ms] 58 pass 0 fail 192 expect() calls Ran 58 tests across 1 file. [1195.00ms] Stopping mock server... All tests pass across all runtimes. Here's the final report: tokens used 51,159 All tests pass across all runtimes. Here's the final report:
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 0.5 minutes.
- Recovered from all 4 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 0.5 minutes after the clone.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
Topics (from GitHub)
ajaxfetchformdatahttphttp-clienthttp-requestjavascriptjsonnodejspromiserequesttypescript
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/wretch)Questions
- Does wretch run?
- Yes. wretch runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 1 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test wretch?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 32d5f68badf7. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test wretch?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.02: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does wretch take to install?
- 0.5 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does wretch need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing wretch?
- 4 things broke in the recorded run, and 4 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for wretch?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.